Allowed

Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC29 Aug 2016CRM-M/7222/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This oral order discharged the petition seeking quashing of FIR No.03 under Sections 406, 420, 506, and 34 of the IPC. The Court accepted the complaint of genuine compromise and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings in accordance with the principle laid down in Gian Singh.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.03 dated 06.01.2016 registered under Sections 406, 420, 506 and 34 of IPC along with all consequential proceedings stood quashed.

Sukhbir Singh Vs State of Haryana & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

Criminal Misc.No.M-7222 of 2016

¶2

....1...

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc.No.M-7222 of 2016 Date of Decision: August 29, 2016

Sukhbir Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana & Anr.

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.B.CHAUDHARI

¶11

Present: Mr.K.S.Sidhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.Karan Sharma, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

Mr.G.S.Dindsa, Advocate, for respondent No.2/complainant.

¶14

A.B.CHAUDHARI , J. (Oral)

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties in FIR No.03 dated 06.01.2016, under Sections 406, 420, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Baragudha, District Sirsa, in which the petitioner is being prosecuted.

¶16

Learned counsel for the complainant categorically states that indeed compromise has taken place between the parties and therefore, respondent No.2 voluntarily wants to compound the offences in question. This Court vide order dated 02.03.2016 had directed for recording of the statements of the parties by Illaqa Magistrate. Accordingly, now a report has been received in the Registry of this Court that the compromise is genuine and can be accepted.

¶17

Having regard to the fact that the parties to the litigation want to buy peace and live in harmony and in view of the decision made in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.) 543 , FIR No.03

¶18

Seema Sharma 2016.08.31 11:12 I attest the accuracy and authencity of the document

¶19

Criminal Misc.No.M-7222 of 2016

¶20

....2...

¶21

dated 06.01.2016, under Sections 406, 420, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Baragudha, District Sirsa along with all consequential proceedings, stands quashed in terms of compromise.

¶22

The petitions is disposed of.

¶23

August 29, 2016 (A.B.CHAUDHARI) seema Judge Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶24

Seema Sharma 2016.08.31 11:12 I attest the accuracy and authencity of the document

Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhbir Singh v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar @ Sonu Vs State of Punjab

Tarun Rathi Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Vivek Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Devender Kumar & Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Navdeep Singh Suhag & Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Karam Singh Vs State of Haryana and Anr.